"Test everything; retain what is good.” (1 Thes 5:21) A laywoman expresses concerns about issues in the Roman Catholic Church to foster positive dialogue by posing and exploring questions.
Please remember that Canon Law says it is not only a right but a duty to question the church. Also, Canon Law provides an over-riding power to the sensus fidelium (sense of the faithful). By this, Canon Law says that if the sensus fidelium (collective of the faithful) reject a law, it is not valid.

Tuesday, January 7, 2014

Pope Francis, priests and monsters...

Stop the presses!What is this I hear Pope Francis said?Did he really say that some priests behave
like “little monsters?” Why, yes, yes he
did say that and even more!He said this
monster-esque behavior emerges from “clericalism”, something he called “one of
the worst evils” and something he attributes to poor seminary formation.“We must form their hearts. Otherwise we are
creating little monsters. And then these
little monsters mold the people of God. This really gives me goose bumps.”- Pope Francis

Hey, those are pretty stiff
accusations against clerics there, Mr. Chief Clerical Officer of the Roman Catholic
Church.Are they warranted or substantiated?

The definition of a monster is “a
powerful person or thing that cannot be controlled and that causes many
problems.”Let’s also review the definition
of “clericalism”: “a policy of supporting the influence and power of the clergy.”

Well, let’s rummage through the
mountain of church writings to see if we can find any evidence of clericalism
and/or monster-making… Ah, yes, here we go.Found something!

An ancient writing dating from
all the way back to 2009 – a report issued after a Vatican visitation of American
seminaries - might help substantiate Francis’ assertion.Here’s some contextual background on the
report. It resulted from a Vatican
visitation (read that “investigation”) into the role seminaries might have
played in the sex abuse scandal.When
the visitation occurred, the Vatican was still trying to portray sex abuse as
an American-only phenomenon.As an
aside, since that visitation, sexual abuse scandals rivaling the U.S.’s
magnitude or worse have erupted in over a dozen countries so I guess that whole
“made in America” thing wasn’t accurate.Anyway, the report was generally favorable towards U.S. seminaries but
highlighted a few negative findings in need of correction that they thought
contributed to the sexual abuse issue.Here’s one:

“The students have an idea of
priestly service, but teachings such as on the character impressed by the
Sacrament of Orders, on the nature of sacra potestas (sacred powers), on the
tria munera (three offices), etc., are not so well known.” In other words, the Vatican felt it was
problematic for seminaries to focus too much on priests doing service … you
know that crazy stuff that Jesus did…and not enough on the “sacred powers” of
the three-fold office, namely the teaching (munus docendi), sanctifying (munus
sanctificandi) and ruling (munus regendi) offices.One might simplify that message from the
Vatican as telling priests to ease-up on helping people and focus more on controlling
them.Let’s see…”institutionalized
clericalism with foundations in seminary?”Check!…as per Vatican
directives.

Here’s another one from that
same report:

“In a few seminaries, the clear
distinction between the common priesthood and the ministerial, hierarchical
priesthood needs to be emphasized more. “This statement reveals Vatican officials believe the hierarchical
superiority of clericalism needs to increase not decrease.Again, I think we can safely place a
checkmark in the “institutionalized clericalism” column for seminaries.

So there you have it. Along
with blaming homosexuals, criticizing seminarians’ behavior outside of the
seminary walls and faulting dioceses for not exalting seminarians and
seminaries enough, the Vatican as of 2009 felt that the sex abuse scandal resulted
from priests not being hierarchical enough, not exerting their “sacred powers”
enough and offering too much service.I
will pause a moment for you to stop banging your head against a hard, flat
surface and also to finish your primal scream therapy.

Done?Ready to continue now?O.K. back to our topic.

I guess I must cede Francis his
“clericalism” point about clergy power fascinations, but “monster?”Isn’t that a bit severe?I mean a monster is a powerful person that
cannot be controlled and that causes many problems.And yeah, the Vatican report on clergy
formation said to focus more on clerical powers… but does that really create priests
who “cannot be controlled?”

Again I dive into the steaming
mountain of church writings and dig all the way down to the 1983 section to
find the latest revision of Canon Law.Rather
than quote lengthy sections from it, let me summarize its power governance laws
using this analogy.Think “dogs peeing
on trees to mark territory.”The church
truly has evolved little further than that in some aspects of church governance.The world is divided into geographical
territories over which a bishop presides and the bishop subdivides his
territory into parishes over which a pastor presides.Only one alpha dog is permitted per marked
territory.

“But doesn’t the bishop reign
over all the parish pastors?” you might ask.

Here the plot thickens a bit.A parish pastor, once appointed by the bishop,
can only be removed under a few very obtusely defined circumstances.As long as the pastor avoids those issues, he
can do whatever he darn well pleases and the bishop has no, zip, nada, the
null-set, recourse.

Even if the pastor violates one
of the lawful reasons for removal, the complex legal processes under Canon Law
tilt toward protecting him and often eventually require approval from the
Vatican Curia - an organization reputed for corruption, inefficiency and sloth-paced
movement in addition to siding with pastors over their bishops.Therefore, most bishops only bother pursuing
priest situations that involve “slam-dunk” transgressions in the eyes of the
Vatican Curia – really treacherous things like pastors who want to talk about female
ordinations.And, no, a pastor raping a
child is NOT a slam-dunk with the Vatican Curia.Thus, many bishops avoid the confrontation,
expense and hassle, and just let pastors do pretty much whatever they want. Oooooh, so that whole “cannot be controlled”
thing is for-real!

I’m sure Francis knows that clericalism
is written into Canon Law and further enabled by bishops unwilling to navigate
the legislative processes that most likely would conclude with the Vatican
Curia affirming the “little monster” anyway.Therefore, I don’t totally agree with Francis.He asserts these clericalism-generated “little
monsters” are the fault of poor seminary training. I think that is only part of it.Seminaries plant the seeds of clericalism but
Canon Law feeds and waters it by bestowing minimally governed, nearly unchecked
powers to pastors (and popes).Furthermore, bishops and the Curia further cultivate clericalism every
time they permissively turn their heads for those few powers that Canon Law
does try to hold in check.

Let’s quickly review the power
path.Popes have the right to appoint every
single Curia leadership position.They also
appoint every single bishop.Bishops
appoint every single seminary rector and together they determine seminary
curriculum.Bishops ordain every single
priest and then appoint every single pastor.

Once the pastor is appointed,
if he is a monster or monster-in-the-making, it is too late.Unfortunately with the reduced number of
clergy, more and more bishops are appointing less and less experienced men as pastors
and their immaturity and inexperience seem to be creating more “little
monsters.”

My dear brother Francis, let’s
face it.Much of the power to correct clericalism
lies in your hands as pope via your Curia appointments, bishops you choose and
indeed even the Canon Laws you do or do not enact.

Keep in mind what’s required to
alter Canon Law. The pope can just decree
something into Canon Law using something called a “motu propio” (literally
means “own motion”).And the beauty of the pope's absolute monarchy is that all of his motions carry. Yes, current church
governance has strayed so far from the laypeople-elected bishops of the early
church that it has devolved into placing the power in the pope’s hand to just
decree things…no lobbying required by the pope to gain mindshare from a single other
elected official because there are none.

Francis has made some new Curia
leadership appointments including in the Congregation for Clergy and the
Congregation for Bishops.However, he has
left in place Pope Benedict’s head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of
Faith – a key office in the bureaucracy of governing priests.Also, I am unaware of him issuing any motu
proprios to adapt the bishop and pastor selection processes, their sweeping
powers, or clergy governance processes.

Things the pope controls could
affect existing clergy immediately.But,
starting with seminary reform instead means effects will not be felt until the
people wait for the bureaucracy of curriculum reform to occur (or not…), and
then for the 4+ years of formation for seedling seminarians after the reforms
take place, and then another 2 or so years before those priests become pastors.

Though I appreciate Francis
might be trying to minimize his own clericalism, the result is years if not decades
more of suffering by the people.And
regardless, all the “formation of heart” in the world will not properly govern human
priests acting like humans and especially human priests when they act inhuman.

How do we contribute to the “worst
of evils” called “clericalism?”What is
our responsibility to eliminate this evil from our church? Is it possible to eliminate clericalism ("the worst of evils") without eliminating the absolute monarchy of the pope?

As background, here are Canon Law’s published reasons for removing a parish pastor:

"A manner of acting which causes
grave harm or disturbance to ecclesiastical communion"

"Ineptitude or permanent illness
of mind or body, which makes the parish priest unequal to the task of fulfilling
his duties satisfactorily"

"The loss of the parish priest’s
good name among upright and serious-minded parishioners or aversion to him,
when it can be foreseen that these factors will not quickly come to an end"

"Grave neglect or violation of
parochial duties which persists after a warning"

"Bad administration of temporal
good s with grave harm to the church when no other remedy can be found to
eliminate this harm"

Here’s a quick summary of the removal
process:

Bishop must become aware of the
inappropriate behavior

Bishop must agree that the
behavior is inappropriate.These two
steps alone can take years and many valid issues never even reach this point.But if they do:

The bishop conducts an
investigation

If concerns are founded, then
the bishop discusses the matter with two other priests

If they believe there is cause
to proceed, then the bishop communicates the reasons to the priest and tries to
persuade him to resign within 15 days

If the pastor doesn’t reply
within 15 days, the bishop renews his invitation to resign

If the pastor doesn’t reply to
the second notice then the bishop issues a decree

If the priest opposes the case,
the bishop invites him to review the case against him and provide his
objections in writing

This might need to be reviewed
with the same two priests from the previous step

If they decide the removal is
still substantiated then there is another decree issued

The priest can be removed from
the parish at this point but the new pastor cannot be assigned until the matter
is resolved with the Vatican Curia and in the meantime the priest must be
provided financial support

By this time, the bishop may
have moved to his next job or died, the priest may have retired or died, but, most
likely, more people will have left the church.

1 comment:

The structure seems to err on the side of potentially feeding the worst of the ego driven clerics, while not properly rewarding the true pastoral presence-except for the people directly affected at the parish level. What a "sticky wicket,indeed."

About Me

I am a single mother of three who from the eyes of the Roman Catholic hierarchy is in full communion with the Church. But I question if any woman is capable of being in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church due to clericalism, sexism, and the marginalization, and emotional abuse of women.
I hold a master degree in theology from Loyola (Master of Pastoral Studies, M.P.S.). I am not employed by the Catholic Church but rather am an executive consultant.
Some ask if I want to be a priest. We are baptized priest, prophet and king. I feel I am more called to exercise my prophetic voice than a priestly one.
(Artwork supplied courtesy of one of my daughters.)